Atheism is Wrong


atheism, in its denial of gods, reaches other explanations by a fallacious reasoning. when the atheist denies a creator being responsible for the origin of the universe they -ssert that the universe was either eternal (which has been debunked by science, see the big bang theory, holographic principle, second law of thermodynamics and the borde guth vilenkin theorem) or proceeded from nothing.

we know thanks to science, that the universe is not eternal and that it had a beginning, a origin and is finite (again, see the big bang theory, holographic principle, second law of thermodynamics and the borde guth and vilenkin theorem). so the eternal universe hypothesis is debunked and thrown out of the window.

in philosophy and logic, nothing does nothing. nothing by definition does nothing. this is where atheists attempt to use science (and fail horribly) to explain this illogical evidenceless belief. atheists -ssert that quantum mechanics prove that particles can come into existence from nothing and therefore it would be possible for universes to spring into existence from nothing too. they cite the vacuum of sp-ce as evidence of this. however the vacuum isn’t actually “nothing” and contains low amounts of energy and has atoms.

“what about chain universes and the multiverse!” the atheist cries. both are science fiction concepts and both move the goal-post and avoid addressing the point of origin. logically speaking, there had to be a beginning point for everything to initiate.
i propose a god who is eternal for this origin point mainly because the natural laws, the values of the universe and the cosmology point to fine tuning (which is agreed upon by physicists, see the goldilock principles of the universe). mathematically speaking, it would be statistically impossible for blind natural force to achieve the equilibrium behind the values for the four fundamental forces. logically speaking we only observe that level of design from intelligence hence why the atheist’s belief makes no sense. atheism is wrong.

sources:

the universe had a beginning and is not eternal:

(origins of the universe) science.nationalgeographic.co.uk/science/sp-ce/universe/origins-universe- article/

(the origins of the universe) www.nsf.gov/about/history/nsf0050/astronomy/origins.htm

(inflation) www.astro.caltech.edu/~ccs/ay21/guth_inflation.pdf

vacuum of sp-ce is not nothing:

(what is a vacuum? is it matter?) education.jlab.org/qa/vacuum_02.html

(is the vacuum empty? the higgs field and the dark energy) www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070510111445.htm

fine tuning of the universe:

is the universe fine tuned for us? (www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/cosmo/fine tune.pdf)

the anthropic universe (www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/sciencesho w/the-anthropic- universe/3302686#transcript\)

a “just right” universe: chapter fourteen, the creator and the cosmos (www.leaderu.com/science/ross-justright.html)
1 more definition
atheism, in its denial of gods, reaches other explanations by a fallacious deductive reasoning. when the atheist denies a creator being responsible for the origin of the universe they -ssert that the universe was either eternal (which has been debunked by science, see the big bang theory, holographic principle, second law of thermodynamics and the borde guth vilenkin theorem) or proceeded from nothing.

we know thanks to science, that the universe is not eternal and that it had a beginning, a origin and is finite (again, see the big bang theory, holographic principle, second law of thermodynamics and the borde guth and vilenkin theorem). so the eternal universe hypothesis is debunked and thrown out of the window.

in philosophy and logic, nothing does nothing. nothing by defintion does nothing. this is where atheists attempt to use science (and fail horribly) to explain this illogical evidenceless belief. atheists -ssert that quantum mechanics prove that particles can come into existence from nothing and therefore it would be possible for universes to spring into existence from nothing too. they cite the vacuum of sp-ce as evidence of this. however the vacuum isn’t actually “nothing” and contains low amounts of energy and has atoms.

when we’ve evaluted atheism in this manner we see that it has no grounding. occam’s razor and other logical principles such as causality reveals the concept of “something from nothing” to be illogical.
science, meanwhile, still doesn’t say that nothing can do something. some atheist scientists have created hypothesizes and universe models for such a concept but they are founded on nothing more than their speculations inspired by their atheistic world-view.

“what about chain universes and the multiverse!” the atheist cries. both are science fiction concepts and both move the goal-post and avoid addressing the point of origin. logically speaking, there had to be a beginning point for everything to initiate. i propose a god who is eternal for this origin point mainly because the natural laws, the values of the universe and the cosmology point to fine tuning (which is agreed upon by physicists, see the goldilock principles of the universe). mathematically speaking, it would be statistically impossible for blind natural force to acheive the equilibrium behind the values for the four fundemental forces. logically speaking we only observe that level of design from intelligence hence why the atheist’s belief makes no sense.

atheism fails to be a logical world-view and is inspired mainly by prayers not being answered, evil existing in the world and an atheist’s irrational hatred towards religion. prayers not being answered but a clear fine tuning of the universe point to deism, not to atheism. in conclusion we find that the chicken came first before an egg. atheism is wrong.

Read Also:

  • PAOTW

    pimpin’ all over the world the fancy cars, the women and the caviar, you know who we are, cause we pimpin all over the world (paotw) – ludacris

  • Palinquent

    1. speaking or spoken unintelligently and forcefully: said or saying something in a confident, expressive, and persuasive way void of any actual facts, truth, or evidence to the contrary. 2. expressing emotion in a rambling, babbling, prattle-like manner: expressing a feeling or thought unclearly, or blatantly promulgating one’s ignorance. sarah palin: “he who warned, uh, […]

  • panatellas

    pancakes & nutella i want some panatellas

  • Atif Aslam

    atif aslam is a pakistani pop singer. he was born in wazirabad / gujranwala and educated in lah-r- and rawalpindi. he is widely recognized in south asia and has given several hit songs such as aadat, woh lamhe, tere bin, pehli nazar mein, tera hone laga hoon, tu jaane na, meri kahani, o mere khuda […]

  • splatterpunk

    horror fiction that usually features graphic depictions of violence, s-x, s-xual violence, violent s-x, gore, and other such things. well known examples include jack ketchum’s “off season” and edward lee’s “the bighead” this is one extreme splatterpunk novel i’m reading 2 more definitions 1)one of many genres that emerged in early 70s horror, mostly as […]


Disclaimer: Atheism is Wrong definition / meaning should not be considered complete, up to date, and is not intended to be used in place of a visit, consultation, or advice of a legal, medical, or any other professional. All content on this website is for informational purposes only.